Thanks so much for visiting us.
We have redesigned and relaunched the CampusClarity blog in a new location as "The Campus Think Tank." We moved all our old posts there and will be publishing all future content on the new site. (Sadly, we will no longer be updating this blog.)
Please check us out at our new site. We have some exciting plans to develop it further. We hope to see you there.
Sincerely,
The CampusClarity Staff
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Friday, January 31, 2014
A White House Call to Action
In an unprecedented move, President Obama added his presidential powers to the pressure building on colleges and universities* to teach students, staff, and faculty how to prevent and respond to rape and sexual assault.
What type of education program is required? The White House is working on providing guidance on this question. On January 22nd, President Obama announced that he had created a White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault to provide schools with best practices and step up enforcement of federal laws requiring colleges to address the problem of campus sexual assault.
Adding to the urgency, the Task Force must deliver to the President by April 22, 2014:
As soon as these examples, recommendations, and proposals are available we will have a better idea of what a compliant education program looks like. Going forward, the Task Force is required to submit annual reports to the President regarding implementation of its recommendations.
On the same day as the White House formed the Task Force, the President's Council on Women and Girls presented its report, "Rape and Sexual Assault: A Renewed Call to Action." This report focuses on the Administration's "major effort to better enforce" federal laws that require institutions of higher education to prevent and respond to campus sexual assault.
As the report points out, both the Department of Education and the Department of Justice are charged with enforcing these laws, including the Campus SaVE Act which requires colleges and universities to provide prevention education programs for students and employees on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.
Currently, the Department of Education is conducting negotiated rulemaking proceedings to draft regulations implementing the specific education requirements of the Campus SaVE Act. Final regulations are expected to be issued by November 2014.
In the meantime, when the Campus SaVE Act became effective on October 1, 2013, the ED said: "we expect institutions to make a good faith effort to comply with the statutory requirements in accordance with the statutory effective date." While we wait for the final regulations, we'll look for the Task Force report to provide further guidance on what constitutes a good faith effort.
* All institutions of higher education that receive federal funds are covered by Title IX and the Campus SaVE Act. These institutions include colleges, universities, community colleges, graduate and professional schools, for-profit schools, trade schools, and career and technical schools.
What type of education program is required? The White House is working on providing guidance on this question. On January 22nd, President Obama announced that he had created a White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault to provide schools with best practices and step up enforcement of federal laws requiring colleges to address the problem of campus sexual assault.
Adding to the urgency, the Task Force must deliver to the President by April 22, 2014:
- examples of prevention programs, and training and orientation modules for students, staff, and faculty, as well as policies and procedures for responding to sexual assault complaints
- recommendations for measuring institutions' prevention and response efforts and making this information available to the public
- proposals for maximizing the government's enforcement activities
As soon as these examples, recommendations, and proposals are available we will have a better idea of what a compliant education program looks like. Going forward, the Task Force is required to submit annual reports to the President regarding implementation of its recommendations.
On the same day as the White House formed the Task Force, the President's Council on Women and Girls presented its report, "Rape and Sexual Assault: A Renewed Call to Action." This report focuses on the Administration's "major effort to better enforce" federal laws that require institutions of higher education to prevent and respond to campus sexual assault.
As the report points out, both the Department of Education and the Department of Justice are charged with enforcing these laws, including the Campus SaVE Act which requires colleges and universities to provide prevention education programs for students and employees on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.
Currently, the Department of Education is conducting negotiated rulemaking proceedings to draft regulations implementing the specific education requirements of the Campus SaVE Act. Final regulations are expected to be issued by November 2014.
In the meantime, when the Campus SaVE Act became effective on October 1, 2013, the ED said: "we expect institutions to make a good faith effort to comply with the statutory requirements in accordance with the statutory effective date." While we wait for the final regulations, we'll look for the Task Force report to provide further guidance on what constitutes a good faith effort.
* All institutions of higher education that receive federal funds are covered by Title IX and the Campus SaVE Act. These institutions include colleges, universities, community colleges, graduate and professional schools, for-profit schools, trade schools, and career and technical schools.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Think About It Wins Gold NASPA Excellence Award
Think About It, CampusClarity's
online substance abuse and sexual violence training program for colleges and
universities, has won the 2014 Gold NASPA Excellence Award for Violence
Education and Prevention.
NASPA, Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education,
is the leading association of student affairs professionals in the United
States. The NASPA Excellence Awards are presented annually in recognition of
NASPA members who are "transforming higher education through outstanding
programs, innovative services, and effective administration."
The awards, which are presented in Gold, Silver, and Bronze
categories, recognize excellence in a variety of fields related to student
affairs and higher education. Winners are determined by a panel of veteran student
affairs professionals, who judge each entry by criteria that include:
- Impact on student learning
- Success in addressing student needs
- Use of innovative and creative methods, practices, or activities
- Application of available or emerging theoretical models and practical research
Think About It is
a collaboration between CampusClarity and the University of San Francisco's
Division of Student Life. In addition to training students to confront and
prevent serious campus problems such as sexual violence and substance abuse,
the program helps schools comply with the training requirements of the Campus
SaVE Act and Title IX, while also providing administrators important insights
into the culture of their campus and student body.
More than thirty-five colleges and universities use Think About It to train their students.
Friday, January 17, 2014
The Intoxicating Camera
It's coming to your campus.
I'm Shmacked, founded by Arya Toufanian and Jeffrey Ray, two twenty-something aspiring filmmakers, turns college campuses into music videos, although perhaps not in the way administrators or parents might hope. In between jump cuts to students crowd surfing and shaky cam shots of students grinding on the dance floor, the videos might showcase a few noticeable campus buildings or cheering crowds at sports games. Academics and classrooms, of course, are noticeably absent. (Though the founders claim they'd like to show them too.)
They insist they're merely there to document the college scene and to help prospective students learn about colleges by showcasing the social life. According to Toufanian, “Kids don’t want to read anymore...Seeing a video is a much more fun way to learn about a school.”
Of course their motto is "I'm Shmacked: It's a movement," which makes it sound less like a documentary project and more like...well, a movement.
The problem is the filmmakers host the parties they claim to document. Indeed, the very name I'm Shmacked suggests their focus. It's not something you say after a hard test. It's something you say after a few shots of hard liquor. At the bottom of their videos, the company claims that "no alcohol or illegal substance is used during filming, just props." Perhaps the camera itself acts as a kind of intoxicant.
Indeed, students eagerly perform for the camera. The camera is not an objective lens onto campus life, but an invitation to perform. Much as alcohol can be used as a kind of permission slip to misbehave, so can the camera and the thrill of being on screen. Perhaps students are compelled by some strange sense of school spirit that measures a university's success in cups of beer. One of the parties, held at University of Delaware, devolved into what police described as a near riot.
Co-founder Arya Toufanian admitted as much in an interview, saying, “I have cameras and a budget now, and a bunch of college kids who will do anything to be on camera.".
Indeed, USA Today quotes one student who claims that I'm Shmacked gives students the ability to "express themselves" differently.
Other students are sensitive to the ways video and social media coax students into performing: "I'm worried that filming it will just exacerbate (students') dangerous behavior so they look 'cooler' on camera," said one student in the same USA Today news report.
Students are also divided on how appearing in one of these videos might affect their professional lives. One student thought it unlikely that he could be identified in the video: "If my future employers were to watch the video," he said, "I doubt the likelihood of them recognizing me."
Meanwhile, another student told the New York Times, “To do this on a video that can go viral, you must have a train-wreck mentality.”
At the same time, we can't completely discount the co-founders claim. I'm Shmacked does document something, though it may not be an entirely accurate reflection of campus life. It seems to open a view onto students' attitudes regarding campus partying and their motives to party in the first place.
I'm Shmacked offers students a chance to be seen and to "represent" their school. It's perhaps no coincidence that the videos often include shots of sporting events and/or shots of campus gear. The parties themselves are a kind of performance and competition. In several of the videos students proclaim their school is the "best." Undoubtedly a sense of competition fuels students to act crazier.
But then again, maybe we shouldn't get so worked up. Much of the actual footage is rather tame. Students screaming, dancing, or crowd surfing are pretty typical. A lot of the motion and action is in the editing.
Perhaps, then, I'm Shmacked offers campuses a way into a more nuanced discussion with their students about why they party. Why is this the story so many students seem to want tell about college? And if partying is about letting loose and forgetting yourself, why would anyone perform or show off for a camera?
In fact, I'm Shmacked has itself tried to open conversations on campus by adding short interviews with students about topics like "one night stands or relationships" or "drunk versus sober."
We don't have answers, but your students might.
I'm Shmacked, founded by Arya Toufanian and Jeffrey Ray, two twenty-something aspiring filmmakers, turns college campuses into music videos, although perhaps not in the way administrators or parents might hope. In between jump cuts to students crowd surfing and shaky cam shots of students grinding on the dance floor, the videos might showcase a few noticeable campus buildings or cheering crowds at sports games. Academics and classrooms, of course, are noticeably absent. (Though the founders claim they'd like to show them too.)
They insist they're merely there to document the college scene and to help prospective students learn about colleges by showcasing the social life. According to Toufanian, “Kids don’t want to read anymore...Seeing a video is a much more fun way to learn about a school.”
Of course their motto is "I'm Shmacked: It's a movement," which makes it sound less like a documentary project and more like...well, a movement.
The problem is the filmmakers host the parties they claim to document. Indeed, the very name I'm Shmacked suggests their focus. It's not something you say after a hard test. It's something you say after a few shots of hard liquor. At the bottom of their videos, the company claims that "no alcohol or illegal substance is used during filming, just props." Perhaps the camera itself acts as a kind of intoxicant.
Indeed, students eagerly perform for the camera. The camera is not an objective lens onto campus life, but an invitation to perform. Much as alcohol can be used as a kind of permission slip to misbehave, so can the camera and the thrill of being on screen. Perhaps students are compelled by some strange sense of school spirit that measures a university's success in cups of beer. One of the parties, held at University of Delaware, devolved into what police described as a near riot.
Co-founder Arya Toufanian admitted as much in an interview, saying, “I have cameras and a budget now, and a bunch of college kids who will do anything to be on camera.".
Indeed, USA Today quotes one student who claims that I'm Shmacked gives students the ability to "express themselves" differently.
Other students are sensitive to the ways video and social media coax students into performing: "I'm worried that filming it will just exacerbate (students') dangerous behavior so they look 'cooler' on camera," said one student in the same USA Today news report.
Students are also divided on how appearing in one of these videos might affect their professional lives. One student thought it unlikely that he could be identified in the video: "If my future employers were to watch the video," he said, "I doubt the likelihood of them recognizing me."
Meanwhile, another student told the New York Times, “To do this on a video that can go viral, you must have a train-wreck mentality.”
At the same time, we can't completely discount the co-founders claim. I'm Shmacked does document something, though it may not be an entirely accurate reflection of campus life. It seems to open a view onto students' attitudes regarding campus partying and their motives to party in the first place.
I'm Shmacked offers students a chance to be seen and to "represent" their school. It's perhaps no coincidence that the videos often include shots of sporting events and/or shots of campus gear. The parties themselves are a kind of performance and competition. In several of the videos students proclaim their school is the "best." Undoubtedly a sense of competition fuels students to act crazier.
But then again, maybe we shouldn't get so worked up. Much of the actual footage is rather tame. Students screaming, dancing, or crowd surfing are pretty typical. A lot of the motion and action is in the editing.
Perhaps, then, I'm Shmacked offers campuses a way into a more nuanced discussion with their students about why they party. Why is this the story so many students seem to want tell about college? And if partying is about letting loose and forgetting yourself, why would anyone perform or show off for a camera?
In fact, I'm Shmacked has itself tried to open conversations on campus by adding short interviews with students about topics like "one night stands or relationships" or "drunk versus sober."
We don't have answers, but your students might.
Friday, January 10, 2014
Is There a Right to Cross-examine in Campus Sexual-Assault Hearings?
When Brian Harris was found responsible for sexual assault and expelled from St. Joseph's University, he filed a complaint
against the school, claiming he was denied an opportunity to "question
and confront his accuser and witnesses to test their veracity and
credibility" in violation of provisions in the student handbook and
"basic due process" (Complaint, ¶¶ 55 and 82(k)).
Harris and other male college students accused of sexual assault have filed lawsuits, alleging that campus investigations and hearings are unfair and biased in favor of their accusers, depriving them of their right to due process.
As we discussed in our post on the standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings, many of these cases center on the credibility of the two parties. The specific question we'll look at in this post is whether in a conduct hearing a student accused of sexual assault has a right to "question and confront his accuser" under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reads:
Before his appointment as a U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Thurgood Marshall represented Alabama State College students who claimed a denial of due process because they were expelled for misconduct without a notice or hearing. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit agreed that due process required the school to give the students notice of and a hearing on the charges before they could be expelled. However, the court said the nature of the required hearing varied, depending on the circumstances. [Dixon v. Alabama State Board of Education (5th Cir. 1961) 294 F.2d 150, cert. denied, 368 U.S. 930 (1961)]
While the Dixon court concluded that a student misconduct hearing (such as one on sexual assault) would require more than a hearing on a failure to meet academic standards, it explained that "more" did not include the right to cross-examination:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit also cited the Dixon case when it acknowledged "[t]he right to cross-examine witnesses generally has not been considered an essential requirement of due process in school disciplinary proceedings." [Winnick v. Manning (2nd Cir. 1972) 460 F.2d 545] Since Glen Winnick admitted that he participated in disruptive behavior in a classroom of students taking a final exam, the court said cross-examination of witnesses would not have changed the outcome and have "been a fruitless exercise." However, the Winnick court left open the possibility that "if a case of a substantial suspension of a state university student has resolved itself into a problem of credibility, 'cross-examination of witnesses might [be] essential to a fair hearing.'"
Following its Winnick decision, the Second Circuit again did "not find it necessary to decide the point" of whether students were entitled to cross-examine witnesses in a conduct hearing involving unauthorized use of a residence hall for a "sleep in." [Blanton v. State University of New York (2nd Cir. 1973) 489 F.2d 377] Again, the court left open the possibility that in student misconduct hearings where the central issue is whether to believe the accused or the accuser the right to cross-examine witnesses may be required.
In a case decided by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, two veterinary students who were accused of academic dishonesty sued their university for violating due process. They were not allowed to directly cross-examine adverse witnesses but were allowed to ask questions through the hearing officer. The court found, while due process required the university to allow the students to respond to the charges, due process didn't require cross-examination of witnesses since student "rights in the academic disciplinary process are not co-extensive with the rights of litigants in a civil trial or with those of defendants in a criminal trial." Therefore, the court concluded that there was no denial of due process. [Nash v. Auburn University (11th Cir. 1987) 812 F.2d 655, 664]
Finally, a U.S. District Court in New York found that a "higher level of formality to ensure fairness" was required to satisfy constitutional due process in a case where a male student accused of rape faced a two-year expulsion. The court described this "higher level" as:
Moreover, the ED's position is consistent with the policy of encouraging students to report incidents of sexual violence. The possibility of facing cross-examination by their assailants would discourage many victims from reporting sexual assault contrary to the goals of the Campus SaVE Act and the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter. These are laudable goals: protecting victims from secondary trauma, encouraging reporting, increasing accountability, reducing sexual assault, and making campuses a safer place to learn.
Harris and other male college students accused of sexual assault have filed lawsuits, alleging that campus investigations and hearings are unfair and biased in favor of their accusers, depriving them of their right to due process.
As we discussed in our post on the standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings, many of these cases center on the credibility of the two parties. The specific question we'll look at in this post is whether in a conduct hearing a student accused of sexual assault has a right to "question and confront his accuser" under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reads:
- In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right … to be confronted with the witnesses against him …
- OCR
strongly discourages schools from allowing the parties personally to
question or cross-examine each other during the hearing. Allowing an
alleged perpetrator to question an alleged victim directly may be
traumatic or intimidating, thereby possibly escalating or perpetuating a
hostile environment.
Before his appointment as a U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Thurgood Marshall represented Alabama State College students who claimed a denial of due process because they were expelled for misconduct without a notice or hearing. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit agreed that due process required the school to give the students notice of and a hearing on the charges before they could be expelled. However, the court said the nature of the required hearing varied, depending on the circumstances. [Dixon v. Alabama State Board of Education (5th Cir. 1961) 294 F.2d 150, cert. denied, 368 U.S. 930 (1961)]
While the Dixon court concluded that a student misconduct hearing (such as one on sexual assault) would require more than a hearing on a failure to meet academic standards, it explained that "more" did not include the right to cross-examination:
- By its nature, a charge of
misconduct ... depends upon a collection of the facts ... [and] an
opportunity to hear both sides in considerable detail ... This is not to
imply that a full-dress judicial hearing, with the right to
cross-examine witnesses is required.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit also cited the Dixon case when it acknowledged "[t]he right to cross-examine witnesses generally has not been considered an essential requirement of due process in school disciplinary proceedings." [Winnick v. Manning (2nd Cir. 1972) 460 F.2d 545] Since Glen Winnick admitted that he participated in disruptive behavior in a classroom of students taking a final exam, the court said cross-examination of witnesses would not have changed the outcome and have "been a fruitless exercise." However, the Winnick court left open the possibility that "if a case of a substantial suspension of a state university student has resolved itself into a problem of credibility, 'cross-examination of witnesses might [be] essential to a fair hearing.'"
Following its Winnick decision, the Second Circuit again did "not find it necessary to decide the point" of whether students were entitled to cross-examine witnesses in a conduct hearing involving unauthorized use of a residence hall for a "sleep in." [Blanton v. State University of New York (2nd Cir. 1973) 489 F.2d 377] Again, the court left open the possibility that in student misconduct hearings where the central issue is whether to believe the accused or the accuser the right to cross-examine witnesses may be required.
In a case decided by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, two veterinary students who were accused of academic dishonesty sued their university for violating due process. They were not allowed to directly cross-examine adverse witnesses but were allowed to ask questions through the hearing officer. The court found, while due process required the university to allow the students to respond to the charges, due process didn't require cross-examination of witnesses since student "rights in the academic disciplinary process are not co-extensive with the rights of litigants in a civil trial or with those of defendants in a criminal trial." Therefore, the court concluded that there was no denial of due process. [Nash v. Auburn University (11th Cir. 1987) 812 F.2d 655, 664]
Finally, a U.S. District Court in New York found that a "higher level of formality to ensure fairness" was required to satisfy constitutional due process in a case where a male student accused of rape faced a two-year expulsion. The court described this "higher level" as:
- At
the very least, in light of the disputed nature of the facts and the
importance of witness credibility in this case, due process required
that the panel permit the plaintiff to hear all evidence against him and
to direct questions to his accuser through the panel.
Moreover, the ED's position is consistent with the policy of encouraging students to report incidents of sexual violence. The possibility of facing cross-examination by their assailants would discourage many victims from reporting sexual assault contrary to the goals of the Campus SaVE Act and the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter. These are laudable goals: protecting victims from secondary trauma, encouraging reporting, increasing accountability, reducing sexual assault, and making campuses a safer place to learn.
Thursday, January 2, 2014
Sextortion, Tweets, and other Dangers of Social Media
This past fall, the FBI arrested 19-year-old Jared James Abrahams, a computer-science student in Southern California, for "sextortion."
Abrahams had infected young women's computers with malware that allowed him to control their webcams and collect compromising pictures of them. He then blackmailed his victims by threatening to go public with the images unless they sent him nude pictures or videos, or did his bidding for five minutes on Skype.
According to newspaper reports, one of his victims pled with him to stop. "Please remember I'm only 17. Have a heart," she wrote. He replied, "I'll tell you this right now! I do NOT have a heart!!!"
Abrahams threatened one young woman by telling her that her "dream of being a model will be transformed into a pornstar."
In November, he plead guilty to extortion and unauthorized access of a computer and now faces up to 11 years in prison and a $1 million fine.
Nor is Abrahams the first sextortion case. In March 2010, another young man, Luis Mijangos, was arrested for similar crimes. After searching his four laptops, the FBI found "15,000 webcam-video captures, 900 audio recording, and 13,000 screen captures" gathered from more than 230 victims, according to GQ magazine.
Meanwhile, as the Abrahams case was unfolding, on a Boston College Confessions Facebook page, where students post anonymous messages about their college experience, a student confessed to raping three women.
In the post, according to the Boston Globe, the student admitted to raping three young women while they were drunk and incapacitated. "On the one hand," he wrote, "I know that I need to get help, but on the other hand, I can't help but be driven to do it again."
After the post caused an uproar, the student who posted it turned himself into the Boston College police, claiming it was a hoax. The student was referred to the student conduct system.
These are admittedly sensational cases. But they illustrate the bewildering and potentially dangerous problems social media can present for college students. We've already written about social media and sexual assault, but cases like those described above make it clear that there are other dangers as well.
In their 2010 annual Campus Computing Survey, the Campus Computing Project found that roughly a sixth of participating campuses reported an incident (such as cyberstalking) related to "student activity on social networking sites." Over a quarter of public universities reported incidents related to social networking sites, almost double what had been reported in 2009.
As we enter a new year, it seems clear that the number of such incidents will continue to rise as more and more students arrive on campus thoroughly engaged with social media like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. According to the Pew Research Center's "Pew Internet and American Life Project," 72% of adults online use social networking sites. For young adults, the numbers are even higher: 89% of 18-29 year old internet users use social networking sites. 30% of 18-29 year old internet users tweet.
Students already have a variety of advice columns, classes, and programs they can take to learn or even major in social media. But in response to the prevalence of social media use, some scholars and administrators want to go further by adding courses on digital identity to the core curriculum.
Writing for InsideHigherEd, Eric Stoller speculated,
Interestingly, one place to look for guidance might be college athletics. Because of the high profile and role student athletes perform as representatives of their schools, their social media use has come under particularly intense scrutiny.
Last year, star Texas A&M quarterback and Heisman winner, Johnny Manziel ("Johnny Football") announced he was leaving Twitter. Manziel had over 330,000 followers on Twitter at the time. He was leaving because his tweets and social media posts had caused too much controversy. "It's fun to have," Manziel told ESPN, "but it can get to be distracting."
The self-imposed ban didn't last. The young star now has over half-a-million followers.
Some schools actively train athletes on how to use social media effectively. Recognizing that a ban on social media is unrealistic, programs encourage students to use social media more self-reflectively by asking them to set goals for social media use and then sticking to them.
In a blog post on athletes and social media, Kevin DeShazo of Fieldhouse Media, a firm that helps student-athletes and coaches manage social media, poses two essential questions for athletes to ask themselves: "Who am I? What do I want to be known for?"
DeShazo elaborates:
In a world where social media is becoming a crucial aspect of many students' identities, not just those caught in the public eye of NCAA sports, that's good advice for any young student.
Abrahams had infected young women's computers with malware that allowed him to control their webcams and collect compromising pictures of them. He then blackmailed his victims by threatening to go public with the images unless they sent him nude pictures or videos, or did his bidding for five minutes on Skype.
According to newspaper reports, one of his victims pled with him to stop. "Please remember I'm only 17. Have a heart," she wrote. He replied, "I'll tell you this right now! I do NOT have a heart!!!"
Abrahams threatened one young woman by telling her that her "dream of being a model will be transformed into a pornstar."
In November, he plead guilty to extortion and unauthorized access of a computer and now faces up to 11 years in prison and a $1 million fine.
Nor is Abrahams the first sextortion case. In March 2010, another young man, Luis Mijangos, was arrested for similar crimes. After searching his four laptops, the FBI found "15,000 webcam-video captures, 900 audio recording, and 13,000 screen captures" gathered from more than 230 victims, according to GQ magazine.
Meanwhile, as the Abrahams case was unfolding, on a Boston College Confessions Facebook page, where students post anonymous messages about their college experience, a student confessed to raping three women.
In the post, according to the Boston Globe, the student admitted to raping three young women while they were drunk and incapacitated. "On the one hand," he wrote, "I know that I need to get help, but on the other hand, I can't help but be driven to do it again."
After the post caused an uproar, the student who posted it turned himself into the Boston College police, claiming it was a hoax. The student was referred to the student conduct system.
These are admittedly sensational cases. But they illustrate the bewildering and potentially dangerous problems social media can present for college students. We've already written about social media and sexual assault, but cases like those described above make it clear that there are other dangers as well.
In their 2010 annual Campus Computing Survey, the Campus Computing Project found that roughly a sixth of participating campuses reported an incident (such as cyberstalking) related to "student activity on social networking sites." Over a quarter of public universities reported incidents related to social networking sites, almost double what had been reported in 2009.
As we enter a new year, it seems clear that the number of such incidents will continue to rise as more and more students arrive on campus thoroughly engaged with social media like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. According to the Pew Research Center's "Pew Internet and American Life Project," 72% of adults online use social networking sites. For young adults, the numbers are even higher: 89% of 18-29 year old internet users use social networking sites. 30% of 18-29 year old internet users tweet.
Interim Measures
Students already have a variety of advice columns, classes, and programs they can take to learn or even major in social media. But in response to the prevalence of social media use, some scholars and administrators want to go further by adding courses on digital identity to the core curriculum.
Writing for InsideHigherEd, Eric Stoller speculated,
Digital identity may be the next addition to 'the core'. The manner in which we engage, share, promote, and present ourselves online has become a major facet in many of our lives. No longer seen as being separate from 'real life', an individual’s digital identity is intricately connected to their overall identity... It’s no longer optional for institutions (and their administrators) to passively engage students via social media. Actively creating learning spaces that foster positive development of digital identity should be our mandate.
Interestingly, one place to look for guidance might be college athletics. Because of the high profile and role student athletes perform as representatives of their schools, their social media use has come under particularly intense scrutiny.
Last year, star Texas A&M quarterback and Heisman winner, Johnny Manziel ("Johnny Football") announced he was leaving Twitter. Manziel had over 330,000 followers on Twitter at the time. He was leaving because his tweets and social media posts had caused too much controversy. "It's fun to have," Manziel told ESPN, "but it can get to be distracting."
The self-imposed ban didn't last. The young star now has over half-a-million followers.
Some schools actively train athletes on how to use social media effectively. Recognizing that a ban on social media is unrealistic, programs encourage students to use social media more self-reflectively by asking them to set goals for social media use and then sticking to them.
In a blog post on athletes and social media, Kevin DeShazo of Fieldhouse Media, a firm that helps student-athletes and coaches manage social media, poses two essential questions for athletes to ask themselves: "Who am I? What do I want to be known for?"
DeShazo elaborates:
We all have different goals and reasons for using social media. Regardless of why you use the platforms, the answer[s] to those two questions are still important. While the answers may change over time, as we grow and mature and goals change, they are still questions that must be answered today. They impact not only what you share online but who you interact with, who you friend/follow, your bio, profile pictures, usernames, etc. Every action and interaction impacts your identity and your reputation.
In a world where social media is becoming a crucial aspect of many students' identities, not just those caught in the public eye of NCAA sports, that's good advice for any young student.
Monday, December 23, 2013
You Can't Be an Alcoholic If You're in College, Right?
Have you heard this one before? It's not uncommon to find it on the lips of college students. For some it's almost a rallying cry.
The sheer prevalence of binge drinking and the youth of college drinkers can mislead students into thinking that heavy drinking is just a college thing, a rite of passage that they'll mature out of, and that it therefore poses little risk to them in the short or long term.
For many students that may be true. But some students won't outgrow their dangerous drinking habits, while others are already suffering the negative consequences of excessive drinking.
Contrary to college lore, there is no minimum age for alcoholism. Sadly, many young adults do meet the criteria for alcohol dependency and abuse. A 2002 study found that 31% of college students abused alcohol and 6% could be diagnosed with alcohol dependency.
A 2007 study identified five "subtypes" of alcohol dependency: young adult, young antisocial, intermediate familial, functional, and chronic severe. Only the chronic severe abusers fit into popular stereotypes of what most of us associate with alcohol abuse, yet they are the smallest percentage of problem drinkers.
Shockingly, young adults made up the largest subtype (31.5%), according to the study. They are also the least likely to seek help for their drinking.
In an interview with Psychiatric News, the researchers themselves expressed surprise with their finding "that so many of the individuals who met diagnostic criteria for alcohol dependence were young adults [in their early 20s]."
Young adult drinkers drank less frequently than other subtypes, but when they drank, they tended to binge (73% of the time). Since over a third of young adult drinkers are still in school, the researchers suggested that "they may be an unrecognized part of the college drinking problem."
More recently, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has changed how they define substance use disorder.
Previously, the APA treated substance abuse and dependency as an either/or scenario: either you had a problem or you didn't. In contrast, the newest Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) treats substance use disorders on a continuum from mild or moderate to severe.
As Dr. Charles O'Brien explained, "In DS- 4, we had essentially two diagnoses: one was abuse and the other, dependence...By doing a lot of research, we've discovered addiction doesn't work that way. It starts off mild at the beginning and becomes gradually more severe."
There was some controversy over the new standards. Critics claimed as many as 40% of college students could end up being labelled as alcoholics if the DSM 5's new diagnoses are followed.
This increase in diagnoses, critics argued, could do more harm than good. Rather than encouraging students to seek help, the diagnosis might lock them into the identity of an alcoholic or addict, causing them to act and think accordingly.
"And that poses a huge problem," wrote Maia Szalavitz for Time, "particularly for adolescents and young adults with mild problems who may be pushed to adopt an addict identity and to see themselves as having no way to control their drinking or drug use if they ever 'relapse'. Rather than empowering those who do have control to use it, these programs essentially tell kids that if they ever have just one drink or puff on a joint, they’re lost."
But if telling students that they're problem drinkers doesn't work, then what other solutions are available?
Some researchers have suggested another approach that avoids the labels associated with substance use disorders. The Harvard School of Public Health, for example, has recently released a series of books that addresses the grey area between normal and problem drinking.
The series is called the "almost effect" and discusses circumstances where individuals may experience negative consequences from their drinking, such as poor sleep, depression, a drop off in work performance, or relationship troubles, but may not qualify for a formal diagnosis of alcohol dependency. They call these individuals "almost alcoholics."
Though they may not be formally diagnosed for a substance use disorder, they may nonetheless benefit from counseling or a brief intervention in order to help them see the connection between their drinking and its consequences.
Dr. Joseph Nowinski, one of the series' authors, explains that the decision that your drinking is a problem "does not imply that you admit to having a 'diagnosis', or that you are 'mentally ill'. Rather, it simply means that you have decided to make some changes in your lifestyle in the interest of your overall health."
In other words, perhaps the problem isn't that students think you can't be an alcoholic in college, but that they're thinking in terms of alcoholic or not alcoholic. Such binary thinking prevents them from seeing how their drinking is beginning to cause them problems and from doing something about it. Even if it's not an official diagnosis and even if it doesn't lead to problems later in life, college drinking can still be a problem now.
The sheer prevalence of binge drinking and the youth of college drinkers can mislead students into thinking that heavy drinking is just a college thing, a rite of passage that they'll mature out of, and that it therefore poses little risk to them in the short or long term.
For many students that may be true. But some students won't outgrow their dangerous drinking habits, while others are already suffering the negative consequences of excessive drinking.
Young Adults and Alcohol Dependency
Contrary to college lore, there is no minimum age for alcoholism. Sadly, many young adults do meet the criteria for alcohol dependency and abuse. A 2002 study found that 31% of college students abused alcohol and 6% could be diagnosed with alcohol dependency.
A 2007 study identified five "subtypes" of alcohol dependency: young adult, young antisocial, intermediate familial, functional, and chronic severe. Only the chronic severe abusers fit into popular stereotypes of what most of us associate with alcohol abuse, yet they are the smallest percentage of problem drinkers.
Shockingly, young adults made up the largest subtype (31.5%), according to the study. They are also the least likely to seek help for their drinking.
In an interview with Psychiatric News, the researchers themselves expressed surprise with their finding "that so many of the individuals who met diagnostic criteria for alcohol dependence were young adults [in their early 20s]."
Young adult drinkers drank less frequently than other subtypes, but when they drank, they tended to binge (73% of the time). Since over a third of young adult drinkers are still in school, the researchers suggested that "they may be an unrecognized part of the college drinking problem."
More recently, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) has changed how they define substance use disorder.
Previously, the APA treated substance abuse and dependency as an either/or scenario: either you had a problem or you didn't. In contrast, the newest Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) treats substance use disorders on a continuum from mild or moderate to severe.
As Dr. Charles O'Brien explained, "In DS- 4, we had essentially two diagnoses: one was abuse and the other, dependence...By doing a lot of research, we've discovered addiction doesn't work that way. It starts off mild at the beginning and becomes gradually more severe."
There was some controversy over the new standards. Critics claimed as many as 40% of college students could end up being labelled as alcoholics if the DSM 5's new diagnoses are followed.
This increase in diagnoses, critics argued, could do more harm than good. Rather than encouraging students to seek help, the diagnosis might lock them into the identity of an alcoholic or addict, causing them to act and think accordingly.
"And that poses a huge problem," wrote Maia Szalavitz for Time, "particularly for adolescents and young adults with mild problems who may be pushed to adopt an addict identity and to see themselves as having no way to control their drinking or drug use if they ever 'relapse'. Rather than empowering those who do have control to use it, these programs essentially tell kids that if they ever have just one drink or puff on a joint, they’re lost."
But if telling students that they're problem drinkers doesn't work, then what other solutions are available?
Drinking Problem versus Problems with Drinking
Some researchers have suggested another approach that avoids the labels associated with substance use disorders. The Harvard School of Public Health, for example, has recently released a series of books that addresses the grey area between normal and problem drinking.
The series is called the "almost effect" and discusses circumstances where individuals may experience negative consequences from their drinking, such as poor sleep, depression, a drop off in work performance, or relationship troubles, but may not qualify for a formal diagnosis of alcohol dependency. They call these individuals "almost alcoholics."
Though they may not be formally diagnosed for a substance use disorder, they may nonetheless benefit from counseling or a brief intervention in order to help them see the connection between their drinking and its consequences.
Dr. Joseph Nowinski, one of the series' authors, explains that the decision that your drinking is a problem "does not imply that you admit to having a 'diagnosis', or that you are 'mentally ill'. Rather, it simply means that you have decided to make some changes in your lifestyle in the interest of your overall health."
In other words, perhaps the problem isn't that students think you can't be an alcoholic in college, but that they're thinking in terms of alcoholic or not alcoholic. Such binary thinking prevents them from seeing how their drinking is beginning to cause them problems and from doing something about it. Even if it's not an official diagnosis and even if it doesn't lead to problems later in life, college drinking can still be a problem now.
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Confidentiality vs. Student Safety
A victim's request for
confidentiality is a problem that schools often grapple with under the
difficult circumstances of a sexual assault case. In a previous post we
discussed how FERPA allows public disclosure of the outcome of student conduct
hearings when accused students are found responsible for sexual assault. But
what about a victim's request for confidentiality when the report is made? Does
the school have an obligation to respect the victim's wishes? The following case provides
one example of how following a school's reporting policies can have unintended
results.
Seventeen-year-old Anna Livia Chen told her residential assistant she would not participate in Swarthmore College's Acquaintance Sexual Assault Prevention workshop for incoming freshmen. As a childhood sexual abuse survivor, Anna said it would be too emotionally difficult for her to listen to other survivor's stories, which is a standard part of the program.
Anna was abused when she was a junior high school student in California. Given that the incident occurred years before and thousands of miles away, Anna and her RA didn't think this needed to be reported to the Title IX coordinator. Swarthmore's sexual assault policy "applies to off-campus conduct that is likely to have a substantial adverse effect on any member of the Swarthmore College community or Swarthmore College … ."
However, a facilitator who contacted Anna to arrange a private session told the RA that Swarthmore's new interim policy requiring all college employees to report information about sexual assault to Public Safety applied to Anna's case. The RA complied by reporting the incident to Swarthmore's Title IX coordinator, but stressed that Anna "was no longer in any danger whatsoever" and had "all the support" she needed from her family, friends, and therapist back home.
The Title IX coordinator, in turn, was required by the school's policy to report the information to the school's general counsel who advised that under Swarthmore's policy the abuse must be reported to the Pennsylvania child abuse hotline. It should be noted that pending Senate Bill 31 would add postsecondary school employees to the list of mandatory child abuse reporters in Pennsylvania.
When she was contacted by child protective services, Anna told CPS that she did not want them to investigate her case. Later, on Anna's 18th birthday, CPS informed her that it was legally required to notify local police about her case.
Swarthmore's Policy Goal
According to Swarthmore's secretary of college, the reporting policy that set this chain of events into motion was meant "to not only meet the letter and spirit of the law, but to ensure that our policies assure the safety of our students, provide meaningful support to victim/survivors, and enable us to respond with the highest levels of fairness, compassion, and respect for privacy."
But this is how Anna described her experience: "So much of my time was being drained by having meetings with various administrators and resources, not to mention the emotional energy it took. I had no time for self-care, which is something that I desperately needed with everything that was going on. I am still frustrated that this process got to a point where it overtook my life in the way that it did."
Now Anna is working on changing Swarthmore's policy and procedures to prevent other victims from having to go through the same experience.
Title IX and Victim Confidentiality
What does Title IX require schools to do to protect a sexual assault victim's confidentiality? First, Anna should have been told that school employees are required to report information they receive about sexual assault. If she wanted the information to remain confidential, she should have been referred to confidential resources, such as religious and professional counselors.
Second, Title IX requires schools to respect a victim's request for confidentiality in a sexual assault investigation and response except when it interferes with the school's ability to stop harassment and protect the safety of its students. The OCR's 2001 Handbook explains:
Seventeen-year-old Anna Livia Chen told her residential assistant she would not participate in Swarthmore College's Acquaintance Sexual Assault Prevention workshop for incoming freshmen. As a childhood sexual abuse survivor, Anna said it would be too emotionally difficult for her to listen to other survivor's stories, which is a standard part of the program.
Anna was abused when she was a junior high school student in California. Given that the incident occurred years before and thousands of miles away, Anna and her RA didn't think this needed to be reported to the Title IX coordinator. Swarthmore's sexual assault policy "applies to off-campus conduct that is likely to have a substantial adverse effect on any member of the Swarthmore College community or Swarthmore College … ."
However, a facilitator who contacted Anna to arrange a private session told the RA that Swarthmore's new interim policy requiring all college employees to report information about sexual assault to Public Safety applied to Anna's case. The RA complied by reporting the incident to Swarthmore's Title IX coordinator, but stressed that Anna "was no longer in any danger whatsoever" and had "all the support" she needed from her family, friends, and therapist back home.
The Title IX coordinator, in turn, was required by the school's policy to report the information to the school's general counsel who advised that under Swarthmore's policy the abuse must be reported to the Pennsylvania child abuse hotline. It should be noted that pending Senate Bill 31 would add postsecondary school employees to the list of mandatory child abuse reporters in Pennsylvania.
When she was contacted by child protective services, Anna told CPS that she did not want them to investigate her case. Later, on Anna's 18th birthday, CPS informed her that it was legally required to notify local police about her case.
Swarthmore's Policy Goal
According to Swarthmore's secretary of college, the reporting policy that set this chain of events into motion was meant "to not only meet the letter and spirit of the law, but to ensure that our policies assure the safety of our students, provide meaningful support to victim/survivors, and enable us to respond with the highest levels of fairness, compassion, and respect for privacy."
But this is how Anna described her experience: "So much of my time was being drained by having meetings with various administrators and resources, not to mention the emotional energy it took. I had no time for self-care, which is something that I desperately needed with everything that was going on. I am still frustrated that this process got to a point where it overtook my life in the way that it did."
Now Anna is working on changing Swarthmore's policy and procedures to prevent other victims from having to go through the same experience.
Title IX and Victim Confidentiality
What does Title IX require schools to do to protect a sexual assault victim's confidentiality? First, Anna should have been told that school employees are required to report information they receive about sexual assault. If she wanted the information to remain confidential, she should have been referred to confidential resources, such as religious and professional counselors.
Second, Title IX requires schools to respect a victim's request for confidentiality in a sexual assault investigation and response except when it interferes with the school's ability to stop harassment and protect the safety of its students. The OCR's 2001 Handbook explains:
In all cases, a school should discuss confidentiality standards
and concerns with the complainant initially. The school should inform the
student that a confidentiality request may limit the school’s ability to
respond … If the student continues to ask that his or her name not be revealed,
the school should take all reasonable steps to investigate and respond to the
complaint consistent with the student’s request as long as doing so does not
prevent the school from responding effectively to the harassment and preventing
harassment of other students.
In its 2008 publication, "Sexual Harassment: It's Not Academic," the OCR listed three factors that must be weighed against the victim's request for confidentiality in light of the school's "responsibility to provide a safe and nondiscriminatory environment for all students":
·
seriousness of the
alleged harassment;
·
age of the harassed
student; and
·
other complaints that
the same individual has harassed others.
....
Additionally, state or local laws may require schools to report incidents to the police.
Additionally, state or local laws may require schools to report incidents to the police.
In addition, the April 2011 "Dear Colleague Letter" included a fourth factor that must be weighed against the victim's request for confidentiality: "the alleged harasser’s rights to receive information about the allegations if the information is maintained by the school as an 'education record' under [FERPA]." The bottom line is that the victim should be told if the school cannot ensure confidentiality.
The OCR's latest official word on victim confidentiality is found in the Resolution Agreement between the OCR and the University of Montana. As part of that settlement agreement, UM adopted a policy with "an assurance that the University will keep the complaint and investigation confidential to the extent possible." Below is UM's policy protecting victim confidentiality:
UM's Policy 507 – Title IX adopted May 25, 2012
IV. Confidentiality of the Alleged Victim:
Student confidentiality will be respected to the extent possible. Even if the alleged victim requests confidentiality or asks that the complaint not be pursued, a campus is required to:
A. take all reasonable steps to investigate and respond to the complaint to the extent possible consistent with the alleged victim’s wishes;
B. notify the alleged victim that the failure of the alleged victim to pursue a complaint may limit the campus’ ability to fully address the matter; and
C. report the incident or assault to local law enforcement authorities if a health or safety emergency as defined by state or federal law is found by the campus to require such reporting.
Summary
To summarize, these are the essential points that college employees need to know about a victim's confidentiality:
·
if you expect to or do
receive information about sexual assault, explain that you need to make a report
to the school's Title IX coordinator
·
maintaining
confidentiality may limit the school's ability to fully respond to the alleged
assault
·
students who desire a
confidential conversation should meet with a counselor or other confidential
resource
·
if individuals prefer
no action be taken at that time, let them know you will share their preference
with the Title IX coordinator
·
explain to the victim
that their request for confidentiality will be respected to the extent
possible, however:
o
the school must
respond to sexual assault effectively and prevent harm to other students
o
the accused student
may have a right to receive information about the allegations if it is included
in the school's education records
Finally, if
disciplinary action is not possible because the victim insists on
confidentiality, the OCR says the school "should pursue other steps to
limit the effects of the alleged harassment and prevent its recurrence."
Those "other steps" are education and prevention, such as defining
sexual misconduct, deciding what the school's policies and disciplinary
procedures are, and possible sanctions for violating the school's rules of
student conduct.
Monday, December 9, 2013
Why Are Students So Unhealthy during Finals Week?
It's that time of the year: the trees are all bare, a coat of frost shines on the sidewalk, the smell of anxietys hangs in the air, and sleep-deprived students lumber around campus unshowered and unshaven. Ah, finals season!
Most of us intuitively understand that stress is connected to students' failure to fulfill even the most basic self-care during finals, but why? After all, students usually don't have class or other commitments during finals week, so they should be able to focus exclusively on studying without ignoring the basics like brushing their teeth and getting enough to eat.
Indeed, one might think that faced with the intense pressure of finals, students would renew their focus and effort. In fact, research suggests otherwise, demonstrating how stress alters the way we make decisions.
When stressed out we tend to focus on short-term rewards and pleasurable outcomes of a decision while ignoring the less savory and long-term consequences. That's why it's so hard to resist eating that pint of ice cream in your freezer after a tough day or to forgo buying that new pair of shoes you covet but can't afford after a miserable meeting at the office.
In other words, it is exactly because students have to study for five finals that a friend's invitation to party tempts them so much. The stress causes them to focus on the immediate reward of going to the party (socializing and drinking) and not the downside of losing a night's sleep to late night carousing (hang over and poor grades).
Stress also makes it more difficult for students to connect bad decisions to their consequences. Even if students go out the night before a test, stress will help them remember the pleasurable experience of socializing and drinking and forget the fact that they were horribly hung over for the exam. This is one reason why researchers also link stress to substance abuse and addiction. Under stress, you focus on the pleasures of the drug and lose sight of the negative consequences.
Am I saying that stress makes us short-sighted and irresponsible? Not quite. Another recent study shows that under stress some people are actually more likely to sacrifice their time to help someone they care about. The research supports the uplifting hypothesis that humankind's default setting is to self-sacrifice (when it comes to close relationships). This is well and good for our species, but it also explains why some harried students take on big social commitments during finals week when they should be making more time for themselves.
All this rather paradoxically suggests that exactly when we need to buckle down and get the most done, we have the fewest cognitive resources to do so because stress saps our willpower. Given this fact, a nudge in the right direction might help students keep their cool and improve their grades.
A few common tips worth reminding students about:
Exercise (like walking) has long been touted as an important stress reliever and memory aid. Recent studies suggest that regular exercise also boosts creativity.
Mindfulness and meditation are also good ways to decompress and still the turbulent waters of daily life.
Also remind students to wait until after finals to make big decisions. The simple act of waiting can help students make better, more reflective choices.
Most of us intuitively understand that stress is connected to students' failure to fulfill even the most basic self-care during finals, but why? After all, students usually don't have class or other commitments during finals week, so they should be able to focus exclusively on studying without ignoring the basics like brushing their teeth and getting enough to eat.
Indeed, one might think that faced with the intense pressure of finals, students would renew their focus and effort. In fact, research suggests otherwise, demonstrating how stress alters the way we make decisions.
When stressed out we tend to focus on short-term rewards and pleasurable outcomes of a decision while ignoring the less savory and long-term consequences. That's why it's so hard to resist eating that pint of ice cream in your freezer after a tough day or to forgo buying that new pair of shoes you covet but can't afford after a miserable meeting at the office.
In other words, it is exactly because students have to study for five finals that a friend's invitation to party tempts them so much. The stress causes them to focus on the immediate reward of going to the party (socializing and drinking) and not the downside of losing a night's sleep to late night carousing (hang over and poor grades).
Stress also makes it more difficult for students to connect bad decisions to their consequences. Even if students go out the night before a test, stress will help them remember the pleasurable experience of socializing and drinking and forget the fact that they were horribly hung over for the exam. This is one reason why researchers also link stress to substance abuse and addiction. Under stress, you focus on the pleasures of the drug and lose sight of the negative consequences.
Am I saying that stress makes us short-sighted and irresponsible? Not quite. Another recent study shows that under stress some people are actually more likely to sacrifice their time to help someone they care about. The research supports the uplifting hypothesis that humankind's default setting is to self-sacrifice (when it comes to close relationships). This is well and good for our species, but it also explains why some harried students take on big social commitments during finals week when they should be making more time for themselves.
All this rather paradoxically suggests that exactly when we need to buckle down and get the most done, we have the fewest cognitive resources to do so because stress saps our willpower. Given this fact, a nudge in the right direction might help students keep their cool and improve their grades.
A few common tips worth reminding students about:
Exercise (like walking) has long been touted as an important stress reliever and memory aid. Recent studies suggest that regular exercise also boosts creativity.
Mindfulness and meditation are also good ways to decompress and still the turbulent waters of daily life.
Also remind students to wait until after finals to make big decisions. The simple act of waiting can help students make better, more reflective choices.
Monday, December 2, 2013
Social Media and Sexual Assault
Audrie Pott's sexual assault was just the beginning of her
nightmare. On Sunday night of Labor Day
Weekend, Audrie passed out drunk at a friend's house. Three male classmates took her to an upstairs
bedroom, where they stripped her down to her underwear, drew on her naked body
in green marker, and sexually assaulted her.
They also took pictures. Audrie
spent the next eight days frantically trying to find out how far those pictures
had spread, and enduring the abuse of classmates who had already seen
them. Then she hung herself.
Sadly, this narrative of the tragic results of the
combination of sexual assault, bullying, and social media is by now a familiar
one. 17-year-old Rehtae Parsons hung herself after a year of bullying prompted
by the distribution of photos showing her rape. The nationally infamous rape
case in Steubenville, Ohio, in which two high school football players were
convicted of sexually assaulting a sixteen-year-old girl, featured similar bullying
and documentation of the assault on social media. Two thirteen-year-old girls
were called "whores" on Twitter after a pair of eighteen-year-old
football players were arrested for statutory rape.
In an age when everything that's newsworthy, and plenty
that's not, is Tweeted, Facebooked, or Instagrammed, it may come as no surprise
that social media has invaded even this particularly ugly aspect of our lives.
However, sexual violence activist and expert Dr. Rebecca Campbell, whose
research we've written about in the past, suggests that the relationship between
sexual assault and social media may be deeper and more disturbing. "Sexual
assault is a crime of power and dominance," she says. "By
distributing images of the rape through social media, it's a way of asserting
dominance and power to hurt the victim over and over again."
Of course, as the cases described above demonstrate, the
continued trauma endured by sexual assault victims through social media isn't
perpetrated solely by their attackers. Any number of their peers share photos
and videos or use social media as a platform from which to bully victims, often
for having reported the assault. In this way, social media discourages victims
from reporting these crimes by facilitating a reaction to assault comparable to
the secondary victimization suffered at the hands of law enforcement that we've
previously written about. Such bullying seems to be both a symptom of and a
contributing factor to a society that blames victims for their sexual assaults.
Yet the very photos and videos whose dissemination can
torture victims of sexual assault can also lead to convictions for their
assailants. Indeed, visual images like these can be essential to securing a criminal
conviction in cases of sexual assault, where muddled recollections and
conflicting accounts can make it very difficult to prove a perpetrator's guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt.
Moreover, some of the very aspects of social media that make
it such a virulent breeding ground for bullying also make it the ideal platform
for survivors to find communities where they can share their stories and receive
much-needed support. The anonymity of
such spaces makes it possible for survivors not yet ready to reveal their
experiences to friends and family to share their stories, allowing them to
spread awareness and, in some cases, help the healing process.
Perhaps its most important aspect though is the potential role
social media plays to prevent assaults in the first place by changing the
culture that tolerates and indeed encourages such behavior. In an article for
the Fordham Observer, Alissa Fajek argues that the outrage over cases like
Steubenville, often fostered and spread via social media, can help to spread
awareness and begin to change that toxic culture.
Clearly, the story of social media and sexual assault is
more complicated than social media simply being used as a platform to fight
sexual assault or as an extension of the crime itself. Because, like any other
tool, the person using it must decide whether social media is used to hurt or
to heal. Educating students about the enormous impact their decisions have on
the survivors of sexual assault suggests the importance of harm-prevention
training. The more students know about social media's effect on sexual assault
victims — the damage it can cause or, alternatively, its power to solve the problem
of sexual assault — the better equipped they'll be to use social media in way
that heals instead of hurts.
Monday, November 25, 2013
Privacy vs. Safety: Does FERPA Apply to Sexual Assault Cases?
Navigating the muddy
waters between protecting student privacy and addressing complaints of sexual
misconduct still causes confusion. Does FERPA prohibit disclosure of
information about sexual assault cases? Many perceive a conflict between the
confidentiality of student records under the Family Educational Rights and
Privacy Act (FERPA) on the one hand, and the competing rights of sexual assault
victims and other students under Title IX and the Clery Act on the other.
While this post is only intended to address whether FERPA prohibits disclosure of information about peer sexual assault complaints, a few basics are in order. As the Department of Education explained in a 2006 interpretation letter, FERPA protects "education records" maintained by or for the school which are tangible documents (including media and electronic data). FERPA does not, however, protect personal knowledge or observations:
While this post is only intended to address whether FERPA prohibits disclosure of information about peer sexual assault complaints, a few basics are in order. As the Department of Education explained in a 2006 interpretation letter, FERPA protects "education records" maintained by or for the school which are tangible documents (including media and electronic data). FERPA does not, however, protect personal knowledge or observations:
FERPA applies to the disclosure of tangible records and of
information derived from tangible records … As a general rule, information that
is obtained through personal knowledge or observation, and not from an
education record, is not protected from disclosure under FERPA.
Therefore, even if an education record exists containing the same information,
FERPA doesn't protect the confidentiality of information independently obtained
from personal knowledge or observations.
In addition, the education records must contain "information directly
related to a student" — in other words, they must directly or indirectly
identify the student. So far this seems pretty straightforward. However, the
various exceptions to FERPA protection when sexual assault is involved seem to
cause confusion.
Starting with a clear exception, schools may disclose — without the accused
student's consent — the final results of a disciplinary proceeding involving
alleged acts that, if proven, would constitute a violent crime or non-forcible
sex offense:1
- to anyone if the alleged perpetrator is found to have committed the offense
- only to the alleged victim if the accused is not found responsible. In this case the victim must be told not to disclose the outcome to a third party
The result of a disciplinary proceeding is not final until after any appeals. Once the result is final the school may disclose the student's name, the offense, and any sanction imposed, as indicated above.
Another slightly more confusing exception allows disclosure of the investigative reports and other records2of campus police and security units involving sexual assault complaints if they are created for a "law enforcement purpose." Whether the records qualify for this exception depends on (1) who created the records, (2) why they were created, and (3) who maintains them.
Under FERPA, if the records are created "exclusively for the purpose of a possible disciplinary action against the student" those records would be "education records." However, the ED Secretary has said that it "expects such occasions to be very rare, especially when incidents involv[e] criminal conduct by students at postsecondary institutions." Thus, if a student reports a sexual assault to campus police and other security staff their records are probably not protected from disclosure by FERPA.
A couple of cases illustrate how FERPA has been misapplied at the expense of student safety. Last year Oklahoma State University did not alert campus or local police when a victim reported to Student Affairs that he'd been molested. Over the next month the accused molester committed more assaults. Finally, a student newspaper reporter received an anonymous tip and contacted police, which led to the perpetrator's arrest. In September, Nathan Cochran pled guilty to three criminal counts of sexual battery for fondling and performing oral sex on other male students while they slept in his fraternity house. Cochran was suspended from OSU for three years.
When the OSU victim first came forward, no tangible education record existed relating to the accused student. LeRoy Rooker, the ED's chief FERPA enforcer for 21 years, said "Just forget FERPA at that point."
And even if an education record existed a third exception, FERPA's health and safety exception likely applied. Again, Rooker provides guidance in ED's 2006 interpretation letter:
This provision allows an educational agency or institution to
disclose personally identifiable information from education records, without
prior written consent,
in connection with an emergency [to] appropriate persons if the
knowledge of such information is necessary to protect the health or safety of
the student or other persons. 20 U.S.C. §1232g(b)(1)(I); 34 CFR §§99.31(a)(10)
99.36.3
In another case, Swarthmore College's disciplinary proceeding found the accused student responsible but the victim felt the sanction did not protect her or other students in part because the accused's identity was never revealed by the school. Though her assailant was found responsible for rape and suspended, he will be allowed to re-enroll after she graduates. In the meantime, his suspension wasn't made public so he continues to visit the campus and present a safety risk. When Liz Braun, Dean of Students at Swarthmore, asked for student feedback about the school's College Judiciary Committee process, the victim described the CJC process as "unnecessarily torturous." She asked a valid question in her response to Dean Braun: "Should the outcomes of CJC hearings and appeals be made public with identifiable names of perpetrators?" In fact, the accused student's name could be made public if the CJC's final decision found him responsible. This would not violate FERPA and could help protect other students.
Responding to a question about obtaining information from schools regarding sexual assaults against college students, ED Secretary Arne Duncan encouraged journalists to seek assistance from Department of Education staff if they encounter schools misapplying FERPA. While participating in a conference call organized by the Education Writers Association, Duncan stated, "Where districts or schools are — I'm not saying they are — but if they're sort of hiding behind FERPA and not sharing simple information, we're happy to try and assist there."
A journalist from Student Press Law Center said she plans to follow up with ED's chief privacy officer, Kathleen Styles. We'll be looking for further guidance on this issue but hope that in the meantime this post provides some explanation of what is and isn't a legitimate use of FERPA when it comes to protecting the privacy of students accused of committing sexual assault.
1. While this post
focuses on sexual assault complaints, this exception to FERPA protection covers
a number of violent crimes and non-forcible sex offenses listed in 34 CFR §99.39 and 34 CFR §99.31(13)and
(14) covers the conditions that allow disclosure of information
without consent.
2. 34 CFR §99.8(b)(1) defines "law enforcement records" as "records, files, documents, and other materials that are — (i) Created by a law enforcement unit; (ii) Created for a law enforcement purpose; and (iii) Maintained by the law enforcement unit." While FERPA allows disclosure, the confidentiality of records maintained by a school's security staff may be restricted by the school's policies or applicable State law.
3. 34 CFR §99.31(10) provides that prior consent not required to disclose information where "The disclosure is in connection with a health or safety emergency, under the conditions described in §99.36."
2. 34 CFR §99.8(b)(1) defines "law enforcement records" as "records, files, documents, and other materials that are — (i) Created by a law enforcement unit; (ii) Created for a law enforcement purpose; and (iii) Maintained by the law enforcement unit." While FERPA allows disclosure, the confidentiality of records maintained by a school's security staff may be restricted by the school's policies or applicable State law.
3. 34 CFR §99.31(10) provides that prior consent not required to disclose information where "The disclosure is in connection with a health or safety emergency, under the conditions described in §99.36."
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
What Happens in College Doesn't Always Stay in College
 |
| Photograph courtesy of Amanda Berg |
The one-night experiment developed into a long-term project, and Berg continued to document her female friends while they partied. The fruit of this project, Berg's photo-essay, "Keg Stand Queens: Binge Drinking among College-Aged Women," explores "the complex relationship women undergraduates have with alcohol."
Berg has plenty of images of binge drinking that we might expect from a photo-essay on college partying: students shotgunning beers, another chugging from a bottle of booze as she flips off the cheering crowd encircling her, and a young woman throwing up in the bathroom after partying too hard.
Other photos show the way drinking insinuates itself into the more mundane aspects of student life like one photograph of a half-empty bottle of Jack Daniels on a bathroom counter, nestled among makeup, toothpaste, and combs.
In some ways, it is this last photo that is the most troubling. It suggests the way drinking becomes as routine as brushing your teeth or combing your hair. Indeed, harm-prevention programs usually educate students about the dangers of binge drinking, but rarely do they mention the dangers of daily drinking.
The Importance of Weekly Limits
The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) defines moderate drinking by both daily and weekly limits. For men, those limits are no more than four drinks a day or 14 drinks in a week. For women, it's three drinks a day or seven drinks in a week. Daily limits protect people from acute risks such as alcohol poisoning. Weekly limits, meanwhile, protect them from long-term risks associated with alcohol such as certain types of cancer.
While alcohol programs generally educate students about daily limits and the dangers of binge drinking, most don't mention weekly limits, even though keeping within both limits is important to students' health.
In a recent study published in Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, Bettina Hoeppner and her colleagues found that 50% of college women and 45% of college men exceeded the NIAAA's weekly limits at least once in their first year of college. The findings reveal a hole in some campuses harm-reduction efforts. By failing to educate students about weekly limits, Hoeppner argues, schools may be missing an important chance to have a long-term impact on students' lives, especially young women.
In fact, recent data show that while young adults binge less after college graduation, they continue to drink just as frequently if not more. "[T]his raises the possibility," Hoeppner speculates, "that the weekly limits become more relevant after leaving the college environment when weekly volume is less likely to be driven by heavy episodic drinking."
Breaking the cycle
College students are still more likely to exceed daily than weekly limits. Indeed, according to Hoeppner's data, almost no students exceeded weekly limits without also exceeding daily limits. Furthermore, the risks of binge drinking (blackouts, injuries, alcohol poisoning) are more acute than the potential long-term effects of regularly exceeding weekly limits. But, as Hoeppner's research suggests, students also need to think about how their drinking fits into a bigger picture.
Just as colleges and universities educate students for professional life after graduation, schools need to consider how their harm-reduction strategies promote healthier lifestyles at college and beyond.
Telling students that alcohol abuse is just a "college" problem reinforces the perception that there aren't long-term consequences to their behavior: "What happens at college stays at college."
Failing to warn students about the long-term consequences of heavy drinking not only lets women down, it lets all students down. Education programs prepare students for life, not just college.
The final image in Berg's photo-essay is a young girl practicing flip cup. She is surrounded by the detritus of a wedding celebration. Empty cups and containers are strewn across the table. In the distance, just out of focus, lies a discarded silver sandal. As Berg told Slate Magazine, "It seems like the end is the beginning, and it just goes on."
Works Cited
Hoeppner, B.B., Paskausky, A.L., Jackson, K.M., Barnett, N.P. (2013) "Sex Differences in College Student Adherence to NIAAA Drinking Guidelines," Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 37, 1779-1786.
Monday, November 18, 2013
Prevention Must Include the LGBTQ Community
Recent research suggests that members of the LGBTQ community
are just as—if not more—likely to be victims of sexual violence as their
heterosexual peers. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2010 Findingson Victimization by Sexual Orientation found that nearly half of lesbian women,
four in ten gay men, half of bisexual men, and three-quarters of bisexual women
have been victims of sexual violence in their lifetime. Such alarming figures
make it clear that sexual assault is a problem that affects students of all
sexual orientations. Moreover, the often marginalized position of the LGBTQ
community compounds and complicates numerous issues faced by survivors of
sexual assault.
For example, as we've written about in the past, it's not
unusual for survivors to be discouraged from reporting by the fear that they
will encounter hostility on the part of law enforcement and other first
responders. The fear of hostility motivated by homophobia compounds the problem
for members of the LGBTQ community. For some LGBTQ survivors, reporting a
sexual assault could mean "outing" themselves before they're prepared
to reveal their sexuality. There's also the fear that, because the conventionally
accepted narrative of sexual violence focuses on heterosexual assaults, an
assault involving members of the LGBTQ community will be sensationalized.
Another ugly fact is that homophobia not only contributes to
underreporting of sexual assault in the LGBTQ community, but can also motivate
assaults against members of that community. According to the University of Minnesota Morris Violence Prevention Center, sexual assault is often used as a
weapon by those who wish to humiliate LGBTQ people for their sexual
orientation, or (especially in cases where a lesbian woman is assaulted by a
straight man) somehow "cure" them of their orientation. The unhappy
overlap between hate crimes and sexual assault is especially important for
administrators to be aware of in light of the Campus SaVE Act's requirements
for schools to include hate crimes based on sexual orientation or gender
identity in their annual security reports.
These issues make clear the importance of harm-prevention
programming that encompasses the entire spectrum of a campus population. The
current conversation about sexual assault on college campuses is, of course,
incredibly important and a welcome change from decades of silence on an issue
that won't go away unless it's addressed directly. But does the conversation
campuses are having about sexual violence include all of the students affected
by the problem? A conversation about sexual violence on college campuses that
revolves around or even assumes scenarios involving heterosexual male
perpetrators and heterosexual female victims fails to address the needs of
survivors whose experiences fall outside the range of that common but by no means
universal experience.
Administrators need
to consider programming designed to help all
students by covering the unique problems faced by members of the LGBTQ community.
By bringing these issues into the conversation, schools encourage students to report
sexual assault, regardless of their gender, race, or sexual orientation. Inclusive and effective prevention training must
recognize the grim but important truth that sexual assault can affect any
student on campus.
Monday, November 11, 2013
Do You Know Your Campus's Sexual Assault Red Zones?
Most schools concentrate their substance-abuse and sexual-violence prevention efforts during the first six weeks of the academic year, a period called the "red zone." First-year women are believed to be at the highest risk for sexual assault during these first six weeks because they are unfamiliar with college social life and thus vulnerable to sexual predators.
Though research does show that first-year women are at greater risk for sexual assault than other undergraduates, no studies (that we're aware of) have shown that the first six weeks of school are the highest-risk period for them.
Researchers, however, have found evidence for other "red zones." These red zones, researchers suggest, are particular to schools and are the result of local factors, such as rush periods, big games, or other important social events.
In a 2008 study, William Flack and his colleagues found that second-year women at one college were at a higher risk for sexual assault between the end of the first month of school and fall break. Flack tentatively attributed this spike in risk to the fact that many second-year women were pledging local sororities before fall break. The high number of parties and heavier drinking during pledge week, Flack suggested, put the young women at greater risk for sexual assault.
Flack concluded: "Risk for unwanted sex associated with the academic calendar year may have more to do with the available range of types of social events in which students engage...the contexts within which those events take place, and the sometimes intense pressures on students to conform to campus social mores, than with students’ inexperience of college social life per se."
Other research, meanwhile, has found that the risk of sexual victimization is evenly spread out across the school year (Fisher et al., 94-95).
Taken together, this research suggests that schools should consider spacing their prevention effects across the entire first year instead of frontloading prevention efforts in the first six weeks of school.
To determine the timing of the programming, administrators might identify major campus events that put students at greater risk for sexual violence or substance abuse and then schedule programming around those events.
Schools could also develop follow-up programming and re-orientations for students in their second, third, and fourth years. These follow ups could present students with new information that is more relevant to their experience -- such as upcoming rush or pledge weeks -- thus allowing students to continue a discussion that often seems to end after first-year orientation. After all, though women may be at a relatively lower risk of sexual assault later in their college careers, programming should be addressed to potential bystanders and perpetrators as well.
Indeed, spreading programming out isn't just consistent with research about red zones, it's also good pedagogy. Spacing any kind of practice across time (rather than massing it in one long event) promotes better long-term retention of material.
Sexual violence is not just a problem in the first six weeks of school and it's not just a first year problem. All students are responsible for preventing sexual violence.
Fisher, B.S., Cullen, F.T., Turner, M.G. (1999) "Extent and Nature of the Sexual Victimization of College Women: A National-Level Analysis." Washington, DC: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Flack, W.F., Jr., Caron, M.L., Leinen, S.J., et al. (2008) "'The Red Zone': Temporal Risk for Unwanted Sex Among College Students," Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 1177-1196.
Kimble, M., Neacsiu, A.D., Flack, W.F., Jr. and Horner, J. "Risk of Unwanted Sex for College Women: Evidence for a Red Zone." Journal of American College Health, 57, 331-337.
Thalheimer, Will. (2006) Spacing Learning Events Over Time: What the Research Says. Work-Learning Research, Inc. Accessed 18th November 2013 <http://www.work-learning.com/catalog.html>
Though research does show that first-year women are at greater risk for sexual assault than other undergraduates, no studies (that we're aware of) have shown that the first six weeks of school are the highest-risk period for them.
Researchers, however, have found evidence for other "red zones." These red zones, researchers suggest, are particular to schools and are the result of local factors, such as rush periods, big games, or other important social events.
In a 2008 study, William Flack and his colleagues found that second-year women at one college were at a higher risk for sexual assault between the end of the first month of school and fall break. Flack tentatively attributed this spike in risk to the fact that many second-year women were pledging local sororities before fall break. The high number of parties and heavier drinking during pledge week, Flack suggested, put the young women at greater risk for sexual assault.
Flack concluded: "Risk for unwanted sex associated with the academic calendar year may have more to do with the available range of types of social events in which students engage...the contexts within which those events take place, and the sometimes intense pressures on students to conform to campus social mores, than with students’ inexperience of college social life per se."
Other research, meanwhile, has found that the risk of sexual victimization is evenly spread out across the school year (Fisher et al., 94-95).
Taken together, this research suggests that schools should consider spacing their prevention effects across the entire first year instead of frontloading prevention efforts in the first six weeks of school.
To determine the timing of the programming, administrators might identify major campus events that put students at greater risk for sexual violence or substance abuse and then schedule programming around those events.
Schools could also develop follow-up programming and re-orientations for students in their second, third, and fourth years. These follow ups could present students with new information that is more relevant to their experience -- such as upcoming rush or pledge weeks -- thus allowing students to continue a discussion that often seems to end after first-year orientation. After all, though women may be at a relatively lower risk of sexual assault later in their college careers, programming should be addressed to potential bystanders and perpetrators as well.
Indeed, spreading programming out isn't just consistent with research about red zones, it's also good pedagogy. Spacing any kind of practice across time (rather than massing it in one long event) promotes better long-term retention of material.
Sexual violence is not just a problem in the first six weeks of school and it's not just a first year problem. All students are responsible for preventing sexual violence.
Further Reading
Fisher, B.S., Cullen, F.T., Turner, M.G. (1999) "Extent and Nature of the Sexual Victimization of College Women: A National-Level Analysis." Washington, DC: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Flack, W.F., Jr., Caron, M.L., Leinen, S.J., et al. (2008) "'The Red Zone': Temporal Risk for Unwanted Sex Among College Students," Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 1177-1196.
Kimble, M., Neacsiu, A.D., Flack, W.F., Jr. and Horner, J. "Risk of Unwanted Sex for College Women: Evidence for a Red Zone." Journal of American College Health, 57, 331-337.
Thalheimer, Will. (2006) Spacing Learning Events Over Time: What the Research Says. Work-Learning Research, Inc. Accessed 18th November 2013 <http://www.work-learning.com/catalog.html>
Wednesday, November 6, 2013
Campus Climate Surveys and the "Information Problem"
Education surveys are nothing new. In fact, the Department of Education was established in 1867 to collect "such statistics and facts … as shall … promote the cause of education throughout the United States."1 In his 1860 education treatise, Herbert Spencer said that asking people how they "think, feel, and act under given circumstances" to solve social problems was a self-evident conclusion: "Society is made up of individuals … and therefore, in individual actions only can be found the solutions of social phenomena."2
Fast forward to the 21st century and schools are using student surveys to help them address the epidemic of sexual assault affecting college women. In a previous post we talked about the University of Montana's "rape-tolerant campus" and its agreement with the U.S. Department of Education to take steps to change the campus climate.
On October 29, 2013, the University of Montana used Amazon gift cards to entice students to complete an annual safe campus survey on their knowledge, attitudes, program use, and experiences. The survey will help UM develop "effective programs and [create] positive change in sexual and interpersonal violence," said UM psychology professor Christine Fiore. This annual survey is part of the "blueprint" for Title IX compliance that resulted from UM's settlement agreement with the ED. The blueprint also includes educating students, faculty, and staff on what is sexual misconduct and how to file complaints.
Other investigations by the ED's Office of Civil Rights call for annual student surveys. The State University of New York reached a settlement agreement with ED on October 31, 2013, and will begin conducting annual campus climate assessments to help improve sexual misconduct policies and procedures at its twenty-nine campuses. In May 2013, the Yale News reported that the school's second "campus climate assessment" found, based on feedback from more than 300 students, it was making progress in addressing sexual misconduct issues.
In addition to a federal investigation, there is the risk of expensive Title IX liability to victims. When schools are faced with six- and seven-figure settlements, why does it take a federal investigation to get to the root of the problem? One possible explanation is what legal scholar Nancy Chi Cantalupo calls an "information problem" about sexual assault and how that impacts a school's reputation for safety.
According to Cantalupo, many schools are reluctant to confront the problem of sexual violence precisely because helping victims and punishing perpetrators requires reporting. Increased reporting drives crime statistics up and makes the school look like a dangerous place to send your children. On the other hand, when victims are discouraged from reporting crimes statistics go down, making the school look safer. Thus, schools have an incentive to discourage reporting to protect their reputations.
However, sociologists and criminologists who study campus violence suggest that ignoring the problem feeds a rape-tolerant culture that leads to higher rates of sexual assault.3 Fortunately, these tragic consequences are turning into stricter enforcement and grassroots action: federal complaints by sexual assault victims are increasing, Title IX enforcement is being taken more seriously,4 and student organizations like Know Your IX are focusing national attention on the problem.
Cantalupo argues that annual student surveys provide more accurate information on the incidence of sexual violence, which helps schools turn their policies, procedures, and education programs into meaningful change. Therefore, Cantalupo recommends that all schools require students to respond to a campus climate survey before they can graduate or register for classes.
Tucker Reed has filed two federal complaints over the University of Southern California's handling of her sexual assault complaint. She agrees that exit surveys of graduating seniors would not only be a better way to find out how many students were sexually assaulted while in college, but could also "pinpoint which programs are working and which aren't."
Student surveys provide a direct source of data that inform a school's Campus SaVE Act education programs, and confront the sexual assault problem with a targeted approach to reducing the rate of sexual violence in all schools, not just those featured in the latest headlines for another federal investigation.
1. The History and Origins of Survey Items for the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Report of the National Postsecondary Education Cooperative (2011).
2. Spencer, H. Education: Intellectual, Moral, and Physical, p. 70 (London: D. Appleton and Company 1860).
3. Cantalupo, N. Burying Our Heads in the Sand: Lack of Knowledge, Knowledge Avoidance, and the Persistent Problem of Campus Peer Sexual Violence (2011) 43 Loyola Univ. Chicago L.J. 205, 218.
4. Cantalupo says, "In fiscal year 2009, OCR had 582 full-time staffers—fewer than at any time since its creation. And it received 6,364 complaints, an increase of 27% since 2002," citing Lax Enforcement of Title IX in Campus Sexual Assault Cases: Feeble Watchdog Leaves Students at Risk, Critics Say, Center For Public Integrity (Feb. 25, 2010).
Fast forward to the 21st century and schools are using student surveys to help them address the epidemic of sexual assault affecting college women. In a previous post we talked about the University of Montana's "rape-tolerant campus" and its agreement with the U.S. Department of Education to take steps to change the campus climate.
On October 29, 2013, the University of Montana used Amazon gift cards to entice students to complete an annual safe campus survey on their knowledge, attitudes, program use, and experiences. The survey will help UM develop "effective programs and [create] positive change in sexual and interpersonal violence," said UM psychology professor Christine Fiore. This annual survey is part of the "blueprint" for Title IX compliance that resulted from UM's settlement agreement with the ED. The blueprint also includes educating students, faculty, and staff on what is sexual misconduct and how to file complaints.
Other investigations by the ED's Office of Civil Rights call for annual student surveys. The State University of New York reached a settlement agreement with ED on October 31, 2013, and will begin conducting annual campus climate assessments to help improve sexual misconduct policies and procedures at its twenty-nine campuses. In May 2013, the Yale News reported that the school's second "campus climate assessment" found, based on feedback from more than 300 students, it was making progress in addressing sexual misconduct issues.
In addition to a federal investigation, there is the risk of expensive Title IX liability to victims. When schools are faced with six- and seven-figure settlements, why does it take a federal investigation to get to the root of the problem? One possible explanation is what legal scholar Nancy Chi Cantalupo calls an "information problem" about sexual assault and how that impacts a school's reputation for safety.
According to Cantalupo, many schools are reluctant to confront the problem of sexual violence precisely because helping victims and punishing perpetrators requires reporting. Increased reporting drives crime statistics up and makes the school look like a dangerous place to send your children. On the other hand, when victims are discouraged from reporting crimes statistics go down, making the school look safer. Thus, schools have an incentive to discourage reporting to protect their reputations.
However, sociologists and criminologists who study campus violence suggest that ignoring the problem feeds a rape-tolerant culture that leads to higher rates of sexual assault.3 Fortunately, these tragic consequences are turning into stricter enforcement and grassroots action: federal complaints by sexual assault victims are increasing, Title IX enforcement is being taken more seriously,4 and student organizations like Know Your IX are focusing national attention on the problem.
Cantalupo argues that annual student surveys provide more accurate information on the incidence of sexual violence, which helps schools turn their policies, procedures, and education programs into meaningful change. Therefore, Cantalupo recommends that all schools require students to respond to a campus climate survey before they can graduate or register for classes.
Tucker Reed has filed two federal complaints over the University of Southern California's handling of her sexual assault complaint. She agrees that exit surveys of graduating seniors would not only be a better way to find out how many students were sexually assaulted while in college, but could also "pinpoint which programs are working and which aren't."
Student surveys provide a direct source of data that inform a school's Campus SaVE Act education programs, and confront the sexual assault problem with a targeted approach to reducing the rate of sexual violence in all schools, not just those featured in the latest headlines for another federal investigation.
1. The History and Origins of Survey Items for the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Report of the National Postsecondary Education Cooperative (2011).
2. Spencer, H. Education: Intellectual, Moral, and Physical, p. 70 (London: D. Appleton and Company 1860).
3. Cantalupo, N. Burying Our Heads in the Sand: Lack of Knowledge, Knowledge Avoidance, and the Persistent Problem of Campus Peer Sexual Violence (2011) 43 Loyola Univ. Chicago L.J. 205, 218.
4. Cantalupo says, "In fiscal year 2009, OCR had 582 full-time staffers—fewer than at any time since its creation. And it received 6,364 complaints, an increase of 27% since 2002," citing Lax Enforcement of Title IX in Campus Sexual Assault Cases: Feeble Watchdog Leaves Students at Risk, Critics Say, Center For Public Integrity (Feb. 25, 2010).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)